I was asked to stop taking photos..

[alsocass]

I went out this morning to take some street photos and ended up with my first experience of being asked to stop.

I was at the local Farmer's Markets which is held at the local showgrounds. I guess it isn't public property. I had my camera out for about three minutes, and I wasn't even taking photos of stalls. I was very unobtrusive (well I thought I was). I continued wandering around the stalls and was approached by security (seriously... security at a farmer's market). I was nice and gave her a quick look at the photos, assured her I was just an amateur out practising the art of photography. She told me that stall holders had been complaining... but I don't believe her, I mean I was taking photos for three minutes tops and the stalls are all in the background, I didn't stand at any stalls taking photos (though I was working up to doing some of that).

I reassured her I wasn't up to anything sinister, that I was just enjoying a morning out while hubby looked after the kids... she laughed with me but also told me I would have to have stall holder and management permission and that management would say no.

I felt a bit shaken up, and despite stubbornly not putting my camera away after I walked off I also was too scared to take anymore photos... which was a shame as their was a jazz quartet playing in the food court... surely I could have taken a photo of that. I nearly went and asked her or them but I couldn't be bothered. It put a yucky spot on my morning and I realised I lost all desire to enjoy my morning at the markets so I left.

I am confused about rights and a bit annoyed about silly behaviours... Surely I was harmless?

[JohnB5319]

I had a similar experience at the markets at Floriade. There's no point arguing with these people - and the joke is that people all around me were talking photos with their 8MP iPhones with no one saying anything to them!

[arthurking83]

Had you had your kids, and a simple tiny P&S .. you would not have been approached!

I was once asked to stop taking photos, and even tho I saw their point of view(that is the management of the facility I was near) .. the security guards that scurried towards me in the ute, laughed when I showed them my images.
I told them(at that particular moment) I just wanted this one particular shot and they were happy for me to get it, but that management was nervous about me being out there taking pics.

Management must surely have thought I was a surreptitious type, gathering unintelligible intelligence for the purpose of a greater gods particular cause .. or something to that effect.

Yeah! right .. in broad daylight with tripod mounted 20cm from the ground usually pointed downwards.

The facility was of course a very prominent and important power facility, so like I said, I can understand their rationale, but the guards had a laugh with me tho.

Got my last shot, and packed it all up.

Funny thing tho .... where I was taking photos, was a particularly interesting setup .. BBQ's a plenty of park space for all and sundry to play on .. and no signage stating photography not being acceptable!
So it begs questions, why have a specific place setup for casual travelers to enjoy, and do management think that nobody in the world owns cameras, or that they don't use them?

and if travelers were to avail themselves of these facilities, and these travelers were surreptitious types on a holy mission from their god to gather unintelligent information, wouldn't this management expect the travelers to be much more discreet than an overgrown oaf, with DSLR, tripods, filters and all manner of obvious gear!!

I'd love to post some samples, but I'd be worried that men with dark glasses and ear pieces may knock on my door a few minutes later .. I'll wait until I'm ready to go out before I do.(I'm not up for having to deal with mormons!)

[old dog]

sorry you had to endure that mindless performance Cass. Better luck next time.

[Wayne]

Sadly, the person charged with being in control of your market premises reserves the right to restrict or prohibit the use of cameras upon their premises. That said, if you shot from outside their premises, but pointing the camera into their premises there is nothing they can do about it.
I would also recommend you don't show zealous security or management personnel your camera/images, as that just encourages and to them reinforces the mistaken belief they have the right to demand such. It is also fact that any image taken prior to being lawfully instructed to cease taking photos does not have to be deleted if these management types demand that you do so.

[extraball]

could it be that stall holders were nervous, because your photographic evidence could, get them into trouble with the ATO for undeclared income?

[Warbler]

A Fact of Life unfortunately. It is much easier for property owners to simply say no, and not explain themselves. You can only really vote with your feet, or use your iPhone instead.

[alsocass]

Sadly, the person charged with being in control of your market premises reserves the right to restrict or prohibit the use of cameras upon their premises. That said, if you shot from outside their premises, but pointing the camera into their premises there is nothing they can do about it.
I would also recommend you don't show zealous security or management personnel your camera/images, as that just encourages and to them reinforces the mistaken belief they have the right to demand such. It is also fact that any image taken prior to being lawfully instructed to cease taking photos does not have to be deleted if these management types demand that you do so.

Thanks, that is a good point. It was all a bit stupid and I wished some common sense could have taken over. It was a case of worst-first thinking... I could have been taking photos of stall holders craft items so I could make them myself, I reassured her that I wasn't. I was glad that I took control of the conversation, I didn't walk away feeling like I had been pushed around, just annoyed that my plans for the morning had been nixed by a silly security guard (seriously security at a farmer's market...).

[ricktas]

Unfortunately publicly accessible does not necessarily mean 'public' in the sense of being allowed a right to take photographs.

The right to take photos applies when you are on public land. This is where this becomes blurred and hard to determine cause many areas the public can have access to are actually classed as private property and thus the owners, hirers etc of that land can stipulate what can and cannot be done on the land (as long as it doesn't breach other laws). Just the same as we each have the right to tell people what we expect of them within our own homes. Things like 'please do not smoke in my home'. Places like markets can have their own rules, and often photography is one of them.

Whilst it can make you feel a bit down, don't let it ruin your newly found joy for photography.

[jim]

Rick is quite right here, though it is a great pity that photographers now seem to almost routinely find themselves questioned, and even asked to stop taking photos in such places.

25 years ago I spent a happy half hour or so at Paddington market in Sydney chatting with a group of girls (aged 10-14 I, seem to recall) who were minding a baby named Zoe and wanted me to take some photos of her. I probably still have the photos somewhere, and I doubt that it occurred to anyone in that crowded market that anyone could possibly object to such an innocent interaction.

[Sifor]

That said, if you shot from outside their premises, but pointing the camera into their premises there is nothing they can do about it.

In practical terms yes, however if there was a gross invasion they can always press for a civil tort action, claiming the photography was interfering with the use and enjoyment of their land (basically the closest thing in Australia to a tort of privacy).

Also just a random thought - taking photos of trademarks on buildings etc can also land us into strife. Again though, probably wont in reality, but something that should be at the back of our minds as it can happen..

[alsocass]

Also just a random thought - taking photos of trademarks on buildings etc can also land us into strife. Again though, probably wont in reality, but something that should be at the back of our minds as it can happen..

I recall using that example when explaining copyright to my web design high school students. If I recall (and it was a few years ago and a bit hazy), it would be a breech of copyright to take a photo of the big M of a McDonalds if that was the prominent part of the photo (ie filled the frame), but if it was just one tiny part of a streetscape (think about photos of Times Square) then it was okay. The interesting discussion with the kids was about how grey areas worked... when did the sign stop being a copyright infringement and start becoming just part of the background.

@Ricktas Thanks for the law info. I read the few law articles on the site. I wasn't sure what my rights were, I wasn't really worried as I am not wanting to annoy anybody, I was more upset about the lack of commonsense.... sometimes it is okay to bend the rules. I mean if I had been standing over a stall taking photos or putting my camera in peoples faces then I completely understand a security guard asking me to stop (or a stall holder for that matter), but I was off to the side and really thought I was blending in pretty well. I took 7 photos over 3 minutes and none were closeups.

Funny how an encounter can affect a person. Sunday mornings is now my morning off, and I went for a drive into the city to have a relaxing stroll around the markets. After the encounter I just lost all interest. It took about 10 minutes of driving and feeling a bit yucky before I said aloud to myself "snapp out of it, this isn't going to ruin my morning" and went off to a new location.

[AVALANCHE]

Unfortunately that is how it can be sometimes alsocass. I hope it does not deter you from trying in the near future.

A strategy I like to use for shooting at festivals/markets is...

If you liked the band playing...maybe next time you see a band at a market playing, perhaps approach them, tell them you would like to get some photos of them performing and in return you could email them some photos. I've done this a few times and never really been knocked back on the offer. Security have stopped me once or twice and I simply say "I am the band photographer" and it is not a lie because all of a sudden you have become just that and you have access everywhere, even on stage! Behave like you belong there and the area is yours! Then you go can go around and shoot elsewhere for a bit. If security doubt you then simply present the great band photos you have taken. I have gotten into a few places without paying doing that...I hold up to my end and provide them photos (Around 10 or so) and the feedback is generally good. I'll post some time tonight actually when I get back home.

[Wayne]

In practical terms yes, however if there was a gross invasion they can always press for a civil tort action, claiming the photography was interfering with the use and enjoyment of their land (basically the closest thing in Australia to a tort of privacy).

Also just a random thought - taking photos of trademarks on buildings etc can also land us into strife. Again though, probably wont in reality, but something that should be at the back of our minds as it can happen..

To my knowledge no such tort currently exists in Australia. Further, it must be said that for any proceeding in tort to be successful, there are a number of things that must be established.

1) A plaintiff would need to show that the tortfeasor had an onus to act in a particular manner established at law.
2) The plaintiff has to show that the defendant acted in a manner contravening that legal obligation.
3) The plaintiff needs to demonstrate that he/she has suffered an injury or some other loss as a direct consequence of the tortfeasor's actions.

[ameerat42]

Here's a thought. (Quick! Perish it!)
Photographers take photos, security guards maintain security.
Try telling the security guard to stop doing that.

(Well, getting back to basics.)

[Mark L]

Sorry, very tired and about to fall asleep. Will read the full thread tomorrow.
However,

...... and management permission and that management would say no.
......

Ask to talk to management then!
Then ask them what the terms and conditions for access to the markets is!
Our local showground is public land as far as I know.
zzzzzzzz

[Rattus79]

I was asked to stop taking photos once...

I quite cheerily put my DSLR away, pulled my phone out of my pocket and proceeded to take photos of the event in question with the phone.

He got my unsubtle point, (there were at least 3 others shooting with phones in the area) turned around and walked away.

Sometimes, it's all bluff and bluster. Other times it's not and poop can happen.
I do not recommend trying my method.

[Sifor]

To my knowledge no such tort currently exists in Australia. Further, it must be said that for any proceeding in tort to be successful, there are a number of things that must be established.

1) A plaintiff would need to show that the tortfeasor had an onus to act in a particular manner established at law.
2) The plaintiff has to show that the defendant acted in a manner contravening that legal obligation.
3) The plaintiff needs to demonstrate that he/she has suffered an injury or some other loss as a direct consequence of the tortfeasor's actions.

It's a form of private nuisance that is actionable in Australia...if the act of taking photos disrupts or interferes with the occupier's use of their land, then prima facie an action can be sustained..e.g if you're on public land taking photos of a market and this is upsetting the stall owners, scaring away customers etc, then the PL has prima facie a cause of action. In real life would this happen? Probably not for trivial things like a market, this is more reserved for serious breaches... but can happen!

[bladesp2]

could it be that stall holders were nervous, because your photographic evidence could, get them into trouble with the ATO for undeclared income?

Not to mention the pirated software ,dvds and a like .Not usually at famers markets though ,but most markets around australia have some nervous stall holders .

[Lance B]

I was asked to stop taking photos once...

I quite cheerily put my DSLR away, pulled my phone out of my pocket and proceeded to take photos of the event in question with the phone.

He got my unsubtle point, (there were at least 3 others shooting with phones in the area) turned around and walked away.

Sometimes, it's all bluff and bluster. Other times it's not and poop can happen.
I do not recommend trying my method.

This is a good idea and one that I will employ in the future if someone asks me to stop taking photos. It just shows the absurdity of it all.

I am getting quite sick and tired of all this to the point where I almost feel like a criminal every time I want to take some innocent photos in some areas.